Comparative Analisys Between The Objective And The Subjective Quality Of Life Approach - Strengths And Weaknesses
Quality of Life (QOL) can be defined as the degree in which the objective needs of an individual are satisfied in relation with the subjective perspective of his well-being. Thus, there are two different approaches in QOL evaluation: the objective approach (which analyzes the quality of life through economic indicators) and the subjective approach (which evaluates quality through the individual's opinion and actions). There isn't a widely accepted view referring to the use of one of those two QOL approaches, each having a series of strengths and weaknesses. This paper presents a comparative analysis of the advantages and disadvantages brought by these two approaches in QOL studies. The objective analysis has a series of strengths (among which we mention the fact that allows valide comparisons and the fact that doesn't depend on individuals perception), but has also a series of weaknesses, starting with the dependence on statistical data, which in many cases has incomplete registrations,and ending with the fact that doesn't reflect the real value of the well-being perceived by population. The motives for which the QOL subjective approach is promoted, therefore its strenghts, refer to the fact that it reflects important experiences for each individual and the fact that it reveals how macroeconomic policies satify the individual's needs. Certainly, this type of QOL analysis has also some weaknesses, like the lack of validity and accuracy in the data collected through surveys. Considering all the above, there is a conclusion with a wide aplication in the present context of the economy: we can't make a clear delineation between the two QOL approaches, moreover we can state the fact that the is a strong correlation between those two. Thus, the most precise systems of quality of life evaluation are those which use both objective, and subjective indicators, reaching a high level of aggregation at the national and international level.
Volume (Year): 1 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Fax: 004 0259 408409
Web page: http://anale.steconomiceuoradea.ro/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ora:journl:v:1:y:2011:i:2:p:55-61. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Catalin ZMOLE)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.